Norite pateikti skundą dėl ES institucijos ar įstaigos?

Ieškoti tyrimų

Teksto paieška

Dokumento rūšis

Atitinkama institucija

Išsprendimo rūšis

Bylos numeris

Kalba

Laikotarpis

Raktiniai žodžiai

Ryšiai

Arba pabandykite senus raktinius žodžius (iki 2016 m.)

Rodoma 1 - 20 iš 63 rezultato (-ų)

Decision in case 1498/2019/NH on the European Parliament not sending its reply to an access to documents request by e-mail

Ketvirtadienis | 28 gegužės 2020

The case concerned the refusal by the European Parliament to send a decision refusing public access to documents by e-mail.

The Ombudsman found that Parliament’s reply to the complainant was reasonable in the given context, as the complainant had already received the decision by registered post.

The Ombudsman closed the inquiry with the conclusion that there had been no maladministration by Parliament in this case.

Sprendimas byloje 1484/2019/UNK dėl to, kaip Europos Komisija atsakė į prašymą suteikti neribotą viešą prieigą prie Komisijos interneto svetainėje paskelbto straipsnio apie Autorių teisių direktyvą versijų,

Pirmadienis | 02 gruodžio 2019

Byla buvo susijusi su Europos Komisijos sprendimu pašalinti Komisijos darbuotojų pavardes iš dokumento prieš suteikiant skundo pateikėjui viešą prieigą prie jo.

Ombudsmenė nustatė, kad Komisija pagrįstai išbraukė pavardes. Ji užbaigė tyrimą nenustatydama netinkamo administravimo.

Sprendimas byloje 552/2018/MIG dėl Europos Komisijos atsisakymo suteikti viešą prieigą prie dokumentų, susijusių su Vokietijos tinklo įgyvendinimo aktu,

Trečiadienis | 20 lapkričio 2019

Byla buvo susijusi su prašymu suteikti viešą prieigą prie Europos Komisijos turimų dokumentų, susijusių su Vokietijos tinklo įgyvendinimo aktu – nacionaliniu teisės aktu, kuriuo siekiama kovoti su melagingomis naujienomis socialiniuose tinkluose.

Ombudsmenė pateikė pasiūlymą dėl sprendimo, prašydama Komisiją persvarstyti savo (dalinį) atsisakymą suteikti viešą prieigą prie dokumentų. Komisija nepateikė atsakymo per ombudsmenės nustatytą terminą. Ombudsmenė pateikė rekomendaciją Komisijai.

Komisija atsakė, kad nesutinka su ombudsmenės rekomendacija.

Ombudsmenė apgailestauja, kad Komisija nesilaikė jos rekomendacijos. Ji patvirtina savo išvadą dėl netinkamo administravimo.

Decision in case 1731/2018/FP on the refusal by the Innovation and Networks Executive Agency to grant public access to the documents submitted by a public undertaking for a funding approval in the context of a call for proposals by the Connecting Europe Facility

Penktadienis | 04 spalio 2019

The case concerned the refusal by the Innovation and Networks Executive Agency (INEA) to grant public access to documents submitted by a national cybersecurity authority that was seeking funding from INEA.

The Ombudsman inquired into the issue and proposed that INEA should partially disclose the requested documents, redacting only information that it considers to be genuinely commercially sensitive or personal data.

INEA rejected the Ombudsman’s proposal, arguing that most of the information that could be disclosed was already in the public domain and the proposed partial disclosure would impose a disproportionate administrative burden on INEA. It also said that it accepted the arguments of the national cybersecurity authority regarding the likely damage disclosure would cause to its commercial interests.

The Ombudsman found INEA’s refusal to grant even partial access to the requested documents to be maladministration and recommended that INEA partially disclose the relevant Grant application.

INEA rejected the Ombudsman’s recommendation. Consequently, the Ombudsman now closes the case, confirming her finding of maladministration.

Recommendation of the European Ombudsman in case 552/2018/MIG on the European Commission’s refusal of public access to documents concerning the German Network Enforcement Act

Antradienis | 11 birželio 2019

The case concerned a refusal by the Commission, in 2017, to give a Member of the European Parliament public access to Commission documents regarding a new German social media law. The complainant considered that the Commission had failed to identify all the documents falling within the scope of her request. Regarding those documents it did identify, she considered that the Commission had wrongly redacted the documents.

The Ombudsman found that the Commission had failed to identify all the documents falling within the scope of the complainant’s request. She also found that the redactions made by the Commission were excessive. She thus proposed that the Commission reassess the scope of the request and reconsider its decision to (partially) deny access to the identified documents.

The Commission did not follow this solution proposal. As the Ombudsman considers the Commission’s handling of the complainant’s access request to constitute maladministration, she makes a corresponding recommendation and expresses her concern at the inordinate length of time the Commission has taken in dealing with this matter.

Decision in case 2124/2017/KT on the treatment of certain journalists by the European Parliament’s Information Office in Cyprus

Ketvirtadienis | 25 balandžio 2019

The complaint was about how the European Parliament’s Information Office in Cyprus selected journalists to travel to a conference in Brussels organised by Parliament. The complainant considered that the Information Office´s outreach policy is not transparent, especially when it comes to selecting journalists to travel abroad to cover its activities.

The Ombudsman found that Parliament’s criteria for selecting journalists were reasonable and concluded that there was no maladministration.